Ethernet for Vehicles Advances

Ethernet technololgy in the car -- a concept that was once unthinkable for the automotive industry -- has been gaining momentum lately.

A coalition of automakers and automotive suppliers said recently that they are forming a special interest group (SIG) aimed at driving broad-scale adoption of Ethernet in vehicles, largely to serve the expected boom of camera-based applications in cars. At the same time, NXP Semiconductors announced that it is licensing Broadcom Corp.'s BroadR-Reach Ethernet technology, which would enable automakers to run a two-wire, twisted-pair type of Ethernet, instead of the four-wire type we've come to know in laptops.

The two announcements are significant if you put them within the context of auto industry trends. Many vehicles now have backup cameras, and many others are going to add cameras for such applications as lanekeeping, adaptive cruise control, and collision avoidance. Because cameras are bit-gobblers, a fast databus, such as Ethernet, makes sense as a data highway connecting those camera applications.

"Features like traffic sign recognition, rear-view assist, blind-spot detection, lane departure warning -- all of these require cameras," Lars Reger, vice president of strategy and new business for NXP Semiconductors, told us in an interview. "Middle- and upper-class cars will soon contain between five and 15 cameras apiece."

The NXP-Broadcom announcement makes even more sense if you consider the importance of weight in the world of vehicle design. Because most of today's vehicles already carry between 45 and 70 pounds of wiring, the idea of adding mass for camera cabling makes automotive engineers cringe. But by cutting the Ethernet cabling from the commonly used four wires to two -- thereby reducing the potential weight -- Ethernet becomes more appealing.

That's probably why NXP and Broadcom are playing a big role in the launch of the new special interest group, known as the OPEN (One-Pair-Ether-Net) SIG. This SIG -- which includes BMW AG, Hyundai Motor Co., Harman International, and Freescale Semiconductor -- is focused on the idea of creating a single physical layer that would enable easy use of Ethernet with vehicle cameras.

The licensing agreement fits neatly into the overall picture, because it marries Broadcom's two-wire technology (developed for use in buildings with old twisted-pair type wiring) with NXP's experience in making transceivers for the CAN, LIN, and FlexRay automotive databuses. The plan is for NXP to make a two-wire Ethernet transceiver that connects to each end of the camera's databus cable.

The irony of this sudden trend is that a few years ago, Ethernet wasn't seen as a solution to any applications in the car. A decade ago, BMW and Daimler fixed on the idea of using the high-speed MOST (Media Oriented Systems Transfer) databus for in-vehicle cameras and video applications. However, MOST has fallen out of favor in some quarters, partially because of cost-related issues.

Makes perfect sense. Thanks for clarifying, Chuck. Luckily for me, I use a Mac so I've never encountered the dreaded "blue screen" <grin>, but I can imagine that the possibility of dealing with any kind of unknown or security breach is too risky especially for power train applications that have such a close correlation to driver safety. Question though: Were there specific advances around Ethernet that drove up its level of determinism?

Perish the thought that a critical Real-Time system would be using a general purpose office OS such as Windows. Modern Real-Time data acquisition and control systems are extremely reliable. For example National Instruments LabVIEW RT (real time) is a very mature product and has embedded solutions and even a real-time hypervisor for running multiple RT instances in parallel. I don't think the BSOD is the fault of the Ethernet communication standard.

I'd love to think that there'd be less wiring, but I find that a bit tough to believe. I think that williamlweaver has it right: the whole system has to be redesigned from the bottom up if we're going to make such a radical shift as moving to a drive-by-wire Ethernet.

You're probably right, Ann. Wiring bundles are going to continue to be an issue for the foreseeable future. Still, all the automakers know something will need to be done eventually. It's kind of like of like building up deabt on your credit card. At some point, you've gotta pay the piper.

I'm a PE in electronics (15 years) and have nothing against technology, but I think this is ridiculous. It's a good example how we apply technology to something that doesn't need it. It does the driver no good, except for complacency while driving, which I'm very against. All the entertainment, cameras and navigation are not needed. Neither is drive-by-wire. Auto manufactures embrace it because it adds complexity to the vehicle. Complexity means more money from specialized equipment, training and perception of value. Why let a small garage repair a problem, when we could force the owner to take to dealer and force the dealer to pay for new equipment and training.. Of course, most people get rid of a vehicle as soon as the warranty expires anyway, so I guess repair cost wouldn't be a factor. I know I'm ranting, but it upsets me that we put so much effort into something that doesn't need it when the areas that do need revamped take a back seat. Example, why does it still take 3 business days for a check to clear a national bank?

David, I agree with you on the entertainment "features" in cars, however, not so much on some of the rest of the electronics. I've got an old car, but a portable navigation system (i.e., GPS). When I'm going some place new, I still like my maps, but as soon as you hit a snag you've got problems. When a road is closed, you miss an exit, you can't read a road sign, or whatever, it sure helps get you back on track without having to try to figure out where you are. As far as the 15 cameras are concerned, yes, that's excessive, but one on the bumper to let you back up far enough, but not too far is a good thing. (Not that I have that on my current vehicle...)

To me, GPS assistance is the only new thing in car electronics that I find useful. But even that has problems, especially in the more remote areas like the one where I live. The problem is simply that, while the GPS function may work just fine, the maps are often wrong because no one's actually come out here and driven the roads. They can also be wrong for different reasons in major cities, where roads change more frequently.

I don't dislike GPS, but I've grown less trustful of it over the years. When it gets confused, it declares, "recalculating," after which it demands that the driver make sudden, unexpected changes. I've had numerous situations in which GPS les me astray, including this one:

Chuck, that sounds pretty bad, indeed. And I remember hearing similar stories from some of my friends with in-car GPS systems back then in 2007. But haven't GPS systems improved much since that article was written?

The key is the databases. GPS is only as good as its databases. And, yes, they're definitely improving. That said, I went back to the same Connecticut location in 2009 and stayed at the same hotel. Again, I rented a GPS system for the vehicle. This time -- I swear I am not making this up -- the GPS led me to a nearby cemetery and told me it was my destination.

Earlier this year paralyzed IndyCar drive Sam Schmidt did the seemingly impossible -- opening the qualifying rounds at Indy by driving a modified Corvette C7 Stingray around the Indianapolis Motor Speedway.

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.